Messages in this thread | | | Date | Tue, 8 Feb 2000 15:26:22 -0500 | From | "J. Scott Kasten" <> | Subject | Re: Source Code Release of NWFS 2.0 for 2.2/2.3/2.4 |
| |
I see the words PROFESSIONALISM and COURTESY mentioned. Sorry, but a major flame like this does not belong on this list.
You mention quality/compatibility and things getting broken in every release. You also mention commercial OS vendors not tolerating this.
Perhaps you've never worked in a real Operating System development environment before. Things get broken all the time in coporations as the developers grow their products into the next official product release. The difference is that customers don't see that process because it's all internal. At my company, day to day firmware builds may or may not even work. That's what the development kernels are, more or less frequent builds where ideas are tried. The official releases are the even numbered kernels, and they do as a rule work solidly with the same quality as any commercial end product release would. If your worried about how it affects your development, then you have the same opptions you would in any commercial environment. Either develop against an official release, or stick with a particular development snapshot that works for what you need to do in the near term and wory about integrating it into the mainstream when the right time comes.
On Tue, Feb 08, 2000 at 09:15:27AM -0700, Jeff V. Merkey wrote:
<SNIP>
> One good example is the VFS in Linux. EVERY release, you guys break > something or there is MASSIVE file system corruption, or memory > corruption, or some other catastrophe that takes days to sort out. > Commercial OS vendors never tolerate this lack of > quality/compatibility. I'm sorry if you are offended, and i withdraw > the allegations (man did I get your dander up -- jeeeeez), but we are > spending money on developing on Linux, and the obvious lack of COURTESY, > PROFESSIONALISM, and QUALITY increases support effort (I have to rewrite > the VFS interface EVERYTIME you post a new kernel. You guys are > constantly BREAKING stuff and LEAVING IT BROKEN and inflicting your > laziness and bugs on the entire planet. If a Microsoft engineer (or > Novell engineer) operated at this level of quality, they would have > their work heavily scrutinized.
<SNIP>
-- J. Scott Kasten
jsk AT tetracon-eng DOT net
"That wasn't an attack. It was preemptive retaliation!"
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |